The University of Rhode Island’s AI lab estimates that GPT-5 averages just over 18 Wh per query, so putting all of ChatGPT’s reported 2.5 billion requests a day through the model could see energy usage as high as 45 GWh.

A daily energy use of 45 GWh is enormous. A typical modern nuclear power plant produces between 1 and 1.6 GW of electricity per reactor per hour, so data centers running OpenAI’s GPT-5 at 18 Wh per query could require the power equivalent of two to three nuclear power reactors, an amount that could be enough to power a small country.

  • Nightwatch Admin@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    Of course there are comments doubting the accuracy, which by itself is valid, but they are merely doing it to defend AI. IMHO, even at a fifth of the estimates, we’re talking humongous amounts of power, all for a so-so search engine, half arsed chatbots and dubious nsfw images mostly. And let’s not forget: it may be inaccurate and estimates are TOO LOW. Now wouldn’t that be fun?

    • simple@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      but they are merely doing it to defend AI.

      No they’re not, you can agree the research is garbage without defending AI. It literally assumes everything. GPT5 could be using eight times the power. It could be using half the power. It could be using a quadrillion times the power. Nobody knows, because they keep it secret.

      • Nightwatch Admin@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Sorry, i meant the comments under the article on toms hardware. I see this on a every tech site: research says it’s impossible amount of power used, and everyone in the comments below will do half arsed calculations with other made up numbers, trying to disprove the researcher, and always only to defend and legitimise their use of ai.
        FWIW I’m not saying that the research here is garbage; it’s a decent attempt estimating by at assuming what you don’t and cannot really know, as long as an OpenAI and their doesn’t publish the data. As far as I know only Mistral published anything at all.

      • Catoblepas@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s highly unlikely they reduced power usage—one of the most consistent criticisms of LLM and image generation—without advertising it.

        • simple@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 day ago

          It’s highly unlikely they would bring more attention to one of the biggest issues AI is causing even if they did make it slightly better